About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
to support the economy in the short run, get us on a sustainable fiscal path in the long run, protect the middle class we're going to see progress in this economy. >> the risk the president wants us to take increasing tax rates will hit many small businesses that produce 60 to 70% of the new jobs in our country. that's the whole issue here. >> on the fiscal cliff front, no new deals or concessions made public, but "the new york times" reports the dynamic has changed. at the request of speaker boehner, senate leaders and nancy pelosi have been dismissed from the negotiating table. leaving just the speaker and the president to hammer this one out. today vice president biden is hosting middle-class families at the white house, continuing to pressure congress to strike a deal on tax rates below 250,000. yesterday, the president struck a hopeful note with a middle-income family in virginia, while maintaining a hardline on negotiations. >> the message that i think we all want to send to members of congress is, this is a sovble problem. i'm not going to sign any package that somehow prevents
revenue. >> the economy is in a different position, the president actually did sign into law a series of cuts, he's proposed a lot in his 2013 budget. it's not like he's been stagnant. we've been having this argument throughout the presidential campaign and guess what? as we keep saying, americans said we're not buying it. the conditions have changed, the economy has changed, i think the outlook in the picture has changed. that's part of the reason the president is so firm about not going back to the debt ceiling conversation again and creating that level of instability and not bending on this issue of raisings the rates on the top 2%. >> yeah. i think -- >> go ahead. >> it's an important point. i think the american people are seeing that the president has already agreed to more than a year ago to that $1 trillion of cuts. that was 100% in cuts as part of the budget control act and he's always said we need a balanced approach. we can't do it through cuts alone. he has proposed additional cuts as part of the process but you need to have that revenue component to have the balanced appro
to gdp in 2013 will be 3.5 percentage point. the economy's growing two percentage points. subtract 3.5, that is a severe recession. >> if we go off the fiscal cliff with no policy changes the near-term negative economic consequences would be significant and most assuredly throw us into a recession. >> comes a day after treasury secretary tim geithner told cnbc the white house is prepared to go the distance if its demands are not met. >> if republicans do not agree to that, is the administration prepared to go over the fiscal cliff? >> oh, absolutely. again we see there's no agreement that done involve those rates going up on the top 2% of the wealthiest. remember it's only 2%. >> former senator alan simpson, co-founder of the fix the debt campaign, choice words and analysis for would-be cliff jumpers. >> when you have leaders of parties and people from the administration saying, i think it will be to the advantage of the democrats to go off the cliff, wealthy it will be advantage to the republicans to go off the cliff or the president to go off the cliff, that's like betting your cou
increases, no spending restraint, and it's very bad in the next -- very bad for the economy and then because of that, very bad in the next election. >> okay. let's just move on to what happens if this plan goes to the floor. jonathan chait in new york magazines republicans are considering having their members vote present on an extension of the middle class tax cuts --. you've talked about not having fingerprints on the murder weapon. is voting present better than voting yes to your mind? >> it strikes me as an odd -- i have not heard anybody suggest this as a strategy other than democrats. it seems a way for the democrats to get what they want. there are a lot of people suggesting to the republicans that they give the democrats what they want, and i guess i would like to suggest the democrats should give the republicans what they want and then we can be even. but again, it's got to pass the laugh test not just for the next 24 hours after a deal is agreed to, but for two years. the bush agreement in 1990 didn't necessarily stink to high heaven in the first four days. it's when you are trying
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)